I do agree with what you have said but are you suggesting that volunteer programs pick up the slack if we shut down food stamps?

Food stamp recipients already rely primarily on private charities for FOOD...food stamps just give them something of monetary value to fence. If anything, food stamp recipients should be ineligible to use food banks, as the monetary value of food stamps far exceeds the financial needs of families receiving aid.

For the record, I'm also in favor of handing out free packets of seed with pamphlets on gardening. It's still a whole lot cheaper and life changing than the food stamp program.

$500 - $600 a month for food?

Holy crap!

That's some good eatin' right there.

while your argument does have some merit, i think that the food stamps program is the best that the government can do. i understand that you think the government should totally get out of it, however if it did that would be going against that which is stated in the preamble of the Constitution, "provide for the common defence, promote the general welfare". I believe that because of what is stated in the constitution it is imparative that the U.S gov. step in to at least attempt to provide for those citizens who cannot provide for themselves.
sure private charities are able to help those who truly need help, but charities alone are not enough to reach all Americans. private charities only work in conjunction with government provided help.

Texas,

And yet that's the kind of money a family of six gets for food stamps...PLUS WIC if they qualify, PLUS automatic approval at most food banks.

Kinda warped, doncha think?

But Gid buddy, you are missing the true point of food stamps. Have you ever wondered why the Food Stamp program is run by the Department of Agriculture? Actually, so is the School Lunch program.

Fact is, niether program was set up to help the poor. They were set up as a subsidy program for agriculture. So, even if all our poor were being fed by private charities (I agree, this is where it belongs), the government would still have to buy all that food, to support the farmers.

As I continue to maintain, you cannot shut down a program, be it welfare or food stamps, based on those who tend to abuse them. All that does is penalize those who really, really need those programs. Sure, it's great that private charities contribute. But, those charities are not guaranteed to feed people, whereas a federal program, such as food stamps, will guarantee that people will eat. And, if it costs me more in taxes, then I'm willing to pay those taxes. It's a much more worthwhile expense than a war I do not believe in, and am thoroughly convinced was waged based on lies and selfish enterprises.

Gid, I know you are a die-hard libertarian, so regulatory federal programs make you angry. But, this kind of program is not regulatory, though admittedly, it can get out of hand. This kind of program supports people who need the support, particularly those who may be medically or emotionally handicapped, and those who need a temporary lift up from poverty. Throwing out this kind of program is tantamount to throwing out the baby with the bath water. Not a good idea.

"provide for the common defence, promote the general welfare".

It does not say the government can/should RUN programs to do this. The idea of welfare as we know it came about as a result of socialist inspired reforms in the 1940's and 1960's, not because of the ideas of the founding fathers.

The facts are facts: Private charities are more efficient, and better safeguards against fraud. And they ARE doing their job. I can attest to the fact that you CAN feed your family entirely off of food from private food banks and your own garden, with need for VERY LITTLE else...in fact, so little that you could scrape up the needed funds just picking cans off the road.

The per capita expenditures of our federal government are appalling: $8566 per YEAR per man, woman and child in this country. And that does NOT count the expenditures of state, county and local governments. The food stamp program is a boondoggle that only serves to fuel drug, alcohol and tobacco use among the poor who need nutrition worse than ANY of those things. And the ones who suffer the most from our current system are the children, who do not make these irresponsible choices but must suffer from the consequences of these choices long into adulthood. We must stop enabling these individuals for the betterment of our nation.

 

Fact is, niether program was set up to help the poor. They were set up as a subsidy program for agriculture. So, even if all our poor were being fed by private charities (I agree, this is where it belongs), the government would still have to buy all that food, to support the farmers.

Oh, I'm well aware of this as well. Farm subsidies are a whole other (but related) issue. They need to go as well.

well then what happens if these charities go belly up? Then who do we have to feed these people?Garbage cans?

i am sure that those who have access to a private charity can feed themselves but i can assure you that not everyone can. i live in rural Kentucky and i promise you it would be quite difficult to get to a private charities headquarters, and in most cases it is those who live in the middle of nowhere who need food stamps the most.

That's some good eatin' right there.

Who do you think affords the $9.99 T-Bones??????

And, if it costs me more in taxes, then I'm willing to pay those taxes. It's a much more worthwhile expense than a war I do not believe in, and am thoroughly convinced was waged based on lies and selfish enterprises.

Frankly, dabe, I agree with this statement 100%. And see, there's yet another reason I believe that the LP proposals offer a better solution.

You see, the LP proposes a dollar for dollar tax credit for donations to private charities. This means that under their proposal, individuals such as you and I could "vote with our wallet" and direct our tax liability towards charities that work to heal instead of kill.

The food stamp program, though, is riddled with flaws. For one, the amounts distributed are insanely huge. This is why you see many food stamp recipients buying steaks; after they've bought the food they need, there's simply TOO MUCH left for them to know what to do with. This is ESPECIALLY true of the frugal families; as someone who has received aid when we've needed it on a few occasions, I can tell you for a fact that when you've spent the $200 or so a month on food your family NEEDS and STILL have $400 left, that same sense of frugality tells you it's a waste not to use it. In our case, we used it on nonperishables so that we would have food left and not need to reapply after our six month period, but too many families don't think for the future. And why should they? There's simply no incentive.

The thing is, our approach to welfare does nothing to promote long term self reliance. For any effective program to work, this needs to change. And employees of the welfare system are not in the proper place to assess and meet a family's true needs. There are many needs that are not/cannot be met by the programs in place. For instance, my wife virtually never gets to leave our community of 500. Why, you ask? Well, simply because she does not drive (and teaching her's a losing battle; I learned that years ago), and we cannot fit all seven of our family into a regular passenger car. We desperately need a van, and with my salary which barely covers our needs and the fact that even a barely running minivan will set you back at least $2500 in this market, that ain't happening. And yet, needed transportation is one thing we cannot get through any of the programs in place (going further: In Pahrump, where most of the jobs to be had require a 60 mile commute to Vegas or Death Valley, and even the local jobs are often 20 miles away, we were unable to obtain transportation to get to and from work. That's why we had to leave).

Frankly, programs such as the food stamp program have forced us as a society to become overly reliant on the government and not to come together as a community. But because government programs are horribly limited in their scope, we need to look to private charities for more effective, longterm solutions.

live in rural Kentucky and i promise you it would be quite difficult to get to a private charities headquarters, and in most cases it is those who live in the middle of nowhere who need food stamps the most.

How, then, do they get to the welfare office?

And why are they not given seeds and encouraged to garden? Gardening can provide income AND nutrition, killing two birds with one stone for them.

Very Good Gideon.  It is a boon doggle.  Such that now, instead of serving the poor, local welfare agencies (that actually do the distribution) are soliciting for candidates!  You should have seen the arm twisting they were doing after Isabel hit here!  And a lot of fraud was committed due to them trying to push food stamps on people not qualified.

Out of 11k employees, the local Welfare agency found over 500 cases of fraud after the hurricane.  And it was for a measly $300 per person!